Unhappy workers and the skills shortage

Nothing generates as much response as the words “bad boss” and “worker dissatisfaction". Judging from the feedback, there’s plenty of that around.

The problem is it’s getting worse and that might have enormous implications for employers with skills shortages looming.

A new survey, reported here, shows that despite the tough economic climate, worker dissatisfaction is on the rise. The survey of US workers showed that most aren’t happy with their compensation or future career prospects and about half have a strained relationship with their boss. That’s despite unemployment there reaching a 26-year high.

So what about you? Writer Gretchen Rubin has a list of 12 questions to ask. The answers will tell you whether it’s worth staying at the job or not, regardless of the economy. Here is the list:

1. Do I know what is expected of me at work?

2. Do I have the materials and equipment I need to do my work right?

3. At work, do I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day?

4. In the last seven days, have I received recognition or praise for doing good work?

5. Does my supervisor, or someone at work, seem to care about me as a person?

6. Is there someone at work who encourages my development?

7. At work, do my opinions seem to count?

8. Does the mission/purpose of my company make me feel like my work is important?

9. Are my co-workers committed to doing quality work?

10. Do I have a best friend at work?

11. In the last six months, have I talked with someone about my progress?

12. This last year, have I had opportunities at work to learn and grow?

One of the reasons why job dissatisfaction is an issue is the growing level of skills shortages. It will get worse with baby boomers retiring or dropping off the perch. It’s a point I examine in a piece I wrote here . When baby boomers were in control, 200,000 people were entering the workforce each year. According to the latest demographic projections, this will fall to 100,000 and will continue scaling down, slipping to 50,000 by 2025. Because there are more baby boomers than those in the Gen X and Gen Y categories, this is likely to exacerbate a skills shortage.

According to this report , 68 per cent of Australian companies have already been affected by the skills shortage and six out of 10 say the skills shortage is hampering their attempts to be innovative. And as reported here, companies are now not spending much on training, which will only make the problem worse.

The growing level of dissatisfaction will add fuel to the fire. As the economy recovers, more people will be leaving their jobs to find more satisfying work elsewhere, or maybe even setting up their own business.

Then again, maybe all this focus on satisfaction is over-rated. Maybe it’s happening because people have higher expectations from work these days. I suspect dissatisfaction is just part of the human condition. We are all restless and ambitious and looking for greener pastures. There are so many more choices around these days so it’s not surprising if people are feeling antsy. Besides, it’s worth asking whether satisfaction and a good pay packet necessarily guarantee productivity. Maybe it might do the opposite.

So how did you score on the test? How satisfied are you at work? What riles you the most at work? What’s needed to make things better? Or do you think workplace dissatisfaction just comes with the territory of having a job?

Post a comment

Comments Terms & Conditions

When posting comments on our blogs, you agree to be bound by our terms and conditions.
Comments that are offensive, defamatory, unsuitable or that breach any aspects of the terms and conditions will be deleted.

Recent comments

Pettro Raz

September 07, 2009

11:23 AM

When you use the phrase "labor shortage" or "skills shortage" you're speaking in a sentence fragment. What you actually mean to say is: "There is a labor shortage at the salary level I'm willing to pay." That statement is the correct phrase; the complete sentence and the intellectually honest statement.

Don't speak about shortages as though they represent some absolute, readily identifiable lack of desirable services. Price is rarely accorded its proper importance in this sort of "worker/skill shortage" rhetoric.

If you start raising your wages and improving working conditions, and continue to do so, you'll solve your “shortage” and will shortly have people lining up around the block to work for you even if you need to have huge piles of steaming manure hand-scooped on a blazing summer afternoon.

RS

September 07, 2009

01:43 PM

Pettro Raz you are a genious - very true and humorous too.

geoff

September 07, 2009

02:19 PM

my beefs:
- constantly being given deadlines where it's impossible to produce a quality result, so you cut corners to make a deadline. The quality of course suffers - hardly leads to work satisfaction
- people who won't accept being questioned or constructively criticised, but who're all too ready and able to destructively criticise (and to shaft) others
- people who make judgements about the value of your work without knowing or understanding properly what it is that you do

I've got two weeks off soon, and if things do not improve in some way, I am looking elsewhere upon my return. I'm one of the most experienced people they've got and I'm very skilled - maybe they'll realise what it was that I was doing when I'm no longer here.

Rory

September 07, 2009

02:37 PM

I'm not surprised by these surveys. The nature of capitalism means that employees are disconnected from their labour.

Generally , employees do not choose when to work, what to produce, how to organise production or what is done with the products and services of their labour.

In addition, workers are only paid a small fraction of the value they add to the products and services they produce.

For these reasons, there is a distinct disconnect here, they cannot recognize themselves in the products and services they produce.

This leads to people feeling that there work and their life is worthless.

Joe

September 07, 2009

02:46 PM

I find that NO ONE will accept responcibilty for anything, so it all comes down to one or two people. Also I find I spend most my day justifying what I'm doing by filling in spreadsheets and attending progress meetings instead of actually using that time to to get the job done. Heaven knows how my boss feels dealing with the apparent "millions" of senior mangers

TestMice123456789

September 07, 2009

02:58 PM

Pettro Raz, well put!!

It’s an issue that has been written to death and yet so badly missed the actual point. Maybe the labour market is asking too much, maybe the employers are underestimating the true cost to achieve innovation. It is a worthy discussion and one at least will offer both parties some clarity on the matter, instead of vague and misleading phrases such as “labour shortage” and “skill shortage”. Potentials for innovation are not killed off by skill or labour shortage, but by employer’s lack of ability to foster the right environment. When people feel they are undervalued as an employee, there is no speak of proactive energy for innovation.

Geoff, I’m willing to bet every dollar that I have you can be off for two weeks, two months or two years and it will not make a difference. No one is irreplaceable. It sucks to be in your position, and I would very much doubt things would change unless an agent of change is introduced into that environment. You are better off use the two weeks to clear your mind, assess your skillset and work out what you want to do next.

boofhead

September 07, 2009

03:28 PM

I am 57 and have had to resort to taking overseas contract work in 3rd world countries because I cannot get employment in OZ. I am in IT and management and am fit, senior, motivated and very experienced (no degree) but only valued OS, and am not wealthy so have to keep going to survive. The countries and peoples are great but I am very unhappy in my workplace because local mamangement styles are often "micro" to the extreme and contract work uncertainties and expectations place a lot of extra stress. Australia, please value your mature workers and I will LOVE to come home, contribute my humble easing of the labour shortage to MY country and have a decent coffee.

anne

September 07, 2009

03:46 PM

I think the questions are most pertinent. I am thinking of leaving my employer and when I go through the questions it becomes apparent that for me it would be the right thing. For example when it comes to question 11 - the answer is "yes" in formal terms - there is indeed a performance management system which includes these discussions, but not really in a way that seemed to be genuine. My manager doesn't really care about my progress - performance management is a task she must deliver on.

I have no quarrel with my organisations's mission or even particularly any issues with the efforts of my co-workers. However, I don't feel that my work or my opinion is important and I am not able to contribute effectively if I am not valued.

I am wasting my time and the organisation's money. They may think they want my skills but when those skills are made available they don't really know how to use them.

geoff

September 07, 2009

03:57 PM

TestMice: thanks. I well understand that no-one's indispensable - that doesn't mean that you don't suffer a loss of productivity when an experienced person leaves. Which I've no doubt is what would occur were I to leave. I'm not saying that I expect that there'll be any big impact while I'm off for two weeks; only that my plan is take the two weeks off, then start looking. I've been here nearly 5 years, so feel that it's probably about time for a move anyway.

Emperor of Pellucidar

September 07, 2009

04:48 PM

Pettro Raz
September 07, 2009 11:23 AM

Your statement about there being a skill’s shortage at a particular price point is only true if you look at a particular employer or a group of employers and additionally manure shovelling scenario is not exactly an example of skilled labour

In simple supply and demand theory yes you are correct. When demand exceeds supply, then price will increase driving down demand as less people can afford the supply and also increasing supply as more people will supply as the financial reward increases.

However your argument will not work very well in the skilled labour market as demand does not generally reduce, it becomes hidden and also there is a finite limit of people able to perform certain skilled tasks until additional people can be trained which takes time. For example:

Let’s say that that you need 5x bakers to produce 10y loaves of bread. Lets also say that you require 12y loaves of bread to feed and maintain a healthy population. Let’s also say that it takes 3 years for a baker to get the necessary skills to produce bread.

On a market basis we need another 1x bakers. So individual bakeries start paying more to employ more bakers in their area to meet market demand. This means the price of bread goes up. Less people can afford to buy bread. Demand has not gone down it has become hidden and people are going hungry. It doesn’t matter how much “dough” (sorry couldn’t resist) you throw at them you will still only have 5x bakers for the next 3 years. Yes some people may die of starvation, driving down actual demand in this 3 year period, but I think I have made my point.

Hans

September 07, 2009

05:16 PM

Pettro Raz
September 07, 2009 11:23 AM

That argument is flawed if you factor in Globalization. If you are selling in an international market, unless your product is so far ahead of its competitors, its hard to justify higher prices than what your competitors can afford to sell it for. And ofcourse they can price it lower, because they manufacture in China and develop software in India. And have easy access to resources.

grant

September 08, 2009

10:42 AM

My big frustration at work is the sheer number of idiots.
For example we have a company policy on what part of prescription safety glasses they will pay for - very nice, but bears no relationship to what is actually available to buy these days.
I've asked HR manager twice to clarify - response is that she will raise it at the next consultative committee meeting.
What's wrong with making a decision these days?

SPB

September 09, 2009

08:48 AM

Pettro Raz, there actually is a labour shortage. Overall, there are more people retiring than there are entering the labour market due to our declining fertility rate. This has been temporarily masked since many have delayed their retirement due to the GFC but as soon as the economy picks up and their super balances start to recover we will lose many workers.

The other part of this problem is that employers are often unwilling to talk to people about their retirement plans or to offer more flexible working arrangements to help people ease out of retirement. This would help organisations as these are highly skilled workers who would make great mentors. This would also reduce the need for them to pay for training courses by offering a much more valuable development experience but it is usually shifted to the "too hard" basket. What a pity.

Joe Public

September 09, 2009

01:14 PM

Interesting comments. Boofhead, some employers are outragously ageist, particularly in IT based on my own personal experiences and I am younger than you. Why its so, maybe environmental fit (companies comprised of very young workers) and also older, mature workers will see straight through the hills of manure that employers use to bait younger workers, in exchange for longer working hours and thug line managers. As for skill shortages, I am sure they exist in some industries but only in small numbers relatively. Plenty of jobs for IT workers in Mumbai, Chennai and Bangalore for example.

Ailie

September 10, 2009

07:56 AM

I've only been working about 10 years of my life, but in that time I've really only had about one 'good' job and that was a temp job a few years ago. I was able to come in, do my own hours and supervise myself, let alone earn a decent hourly rate. Was great.

My current job is just a disaster. Pay is terrible with the only benefit of it's peanut status being that I pay hardly any tax as a result. The other staff drag their feet and generally don't care, and then because I'm actually a good worker, I'm the one that gets shouldered with the burden of all the extra work and then nicely told off when I decide to do the bare minimum just like everyone else (formal warning and all). Is it any wonder I'm desperately looking for another job?!

The bad part is, living in a regional area with not much call for my skills means being stuck applying for jobs 'below' my skill level. Personally I wouldn't mind sitting at a reception desk all day atm, but try convince employers that someone with over 4 years marketing/PR experience is going to be satisfied with that.

jimi

September 11, 2009

03:02 AM

Emperor of Pellucidar September 07, 2009 04:48 PM

I've got another example, a tollway. As traffic volumes grow a tollway need never suffer congestion if the toll is increased appropriately. But it just drives traffic and congestion elsewhere.

Dave from Brisbane

September 16, 2009

03:19 PM

I'm in the recruitment industry. We recently released research to our clients that identified a major gap between employers (seeing higher productivity during the GFC) and employees (motivated by fear of losing jobs, less career opps, no training / development). What I find ironic is that my industry has one of the highest turnover rates of any and middle level managers don't seem to care if people leave. About 80% of people leave due to poor r'ship with their boss - but bosses don't seem to care about developing people and retaining them - that's too hard I suppose. I see candidates who are increasingly frustrated at middle level managers without the skills required to retain staff (people skills, communication and leadership ability). We all just want to work where we're appreciated and valued - is that too hard to ask ? Companies are so fixated on growth (evidently unsustainable if we were to learn any lessons from the GFC, environmental issues etc) that they often only pay lip-service to "their greatest assets - the employees". We don't work in democracies and cannot vote out managers who are usually only promoted because they play the internal political games required to move up. And no wonder length of tenure and loyalty is decreasing with every new generation (que her for baby boomers to sigh at the intransient Gen Y's and wonder why Gen Xers won't employ them). The aggressive corporate world is more focused on short term gains (driven by massive bonuses for senior managers who see staff as cannon fodder) than an inclusive people driven approach (wonder why society is becoming more aggressive and materialistic if our "heroes" are so self centred?). Where have the real leaders gone ?

Disillusioned

September 20, 2009

07:32 AM

Good articles and comments. Boofhead makes a great point - I am a 45 y.o. American with full OZ work rights, 20 years IT experience, Bachelor and Master degrees and have been unable to find work since arriving 12 months ago. I have had 6 interviews for 250+ applications.

America has the best IT in the world, yet I may relegated to driving a cab - I am now considering taking my skills back to America (with my Aussie wife). The sad part is that I know several emigrants like myself, well-educated, well-skilled, well-appreciated and employable in other parts of the world, but not in OZ.

OZ is wasting human resources and that bodes ill for the future. The future is about knowledge-workers and intellectual property, resources are finite, the imagination of smart people is not. Australia will NEVER be able to produce as many well-educated, well-skilled people as the U.S., China, India and other large Asian countries - so it must be smarter about using what it has. Right now that is not happening.

YellowTrolley

September 21, 2009

06:48 AM

Pettro Raz - yup agree with you.

Here is a story to share.
A friend works in an accounting firm. The bosses were looking for an accountant. After a few months, the firm concluded that there's a skill shortage - because they couldn't find anyone. Wrong - they just did not prepare to pay anything for anyone. Solution? They now outsource the tax job overseas. Apparently it costs so much less than employing a graduate with no experience what-so-ever - and the bosses are now happy.
So... unfortunately the story supports Hans as well.
I so don't like it.

Rob

September 23, 2009

04:35 PM

I think this blog is brilliant! I am sending the link around.

ozzmatt83

November 16, 2009

09:49 PM

So, the fact that you need a certification to wipe your arse, or that there is a centralized apprentice program, or the excessive regulation present in every level of the workplace does nothing to contribute to the skills shortage?

Lonewolf

February 24, 2010

05:29 PM

I'm 43 a process operator, I like my job and the company , and the people , i'm responsible and accountable for my area but are given no authority to act on things such as improvements to plant , better organisation of the area behavouiral issues of lazy operators (which I don't blame them for). I wrote a email to management and owner, with my concerns and explained my frustration , as I feel i;m just a scapegoat for middle managers and supervisors and, put across my ideas/improvements, I let them know i'm held responsible for everything but my hands are tied as I can't act on anything and I suggested management and supervisors should start taking responsibility for issues rather than handballing them to operators etc., Now i'm worried when they get their emails I might be hung! What do you think?

Comments Terms & Conditions

When posting comments on our blogs, you agree to be bound by our terms and conditions.
Comments that are offensive, defamatory, unsuitable or that breach any aspects of the terms and conditions will be deleted.

Leon Gettler is a contributor to The Age, specialising on management issues. His interests include business ethics, corporate governance and the intricacies of the US Sarbanes-Oxley ruling. He is the author of two books, including Organisations Behaving Badly: A Greek tragedy of corporate pathology, which focuses on the forces that lead smart executives to make dumb decisions.